So Pfizer has discontinued around 100 early stage programs. Assuming it will try to outlicense these, some will probably not get taken on in the near future by anyone else.

Given these drugs could potentially reach the market and be beneficial in various disease areas, do you think companies should have to sell such assets within a reasonable time period / be forced to sell at rock bottom prices to avoid the drug / IP effectively being locked up and lost?

Posted 29th January 2010, 17:00:35

Good question tut.

I'm honestly not sure what the rules are around this (if there are any) but suspect Pfizer doesn't have to release the IP on any of these drugs even if it has no intention of developing them further or outlicensing.

Chances are most early stage projects will fail but you never know what's in there.

Posted 3rd February 2010, 23:43:54

There should be a set time limit (say 2 years) where if no substantial development work is done they are forced to sell the assets at no more than an appropriate price determined by an external independent committee, or if multiple parties are interested the highest bid.

Posted 9th February 2010, 20:27:17

Hmnmm...I'm not sure any time limit would work. They would find some loophole, do one assay or something to circumvent it.

Posted 10th February 2010, 18:22:28

Just don't see this happening. How could you ever force pharma to give away assets?

If anyone can suggest a workable model here I'm listening but given companies won't even talk that much about early stage assets I'll believe it when I can see it.

Posted 12th February 2010, 16:46:19

I'm sure Pfizer will be taking the philanthropic view and handing these over real soon...

;)

They are a commercial company people!

Posted 23rd February 2010, 18:01:07

I think it will be brave company that wants to take these on. Think of the analytical power Pfizer has in assessing which early-stage projects have potential and which don't. If you think they've got it wrong then that's one heck of a gamble.

Posted 29th April 2010, 11:13:57

It's not about Pfizer getting it "wrong" but more about whether something is of sufficient size and fit with their portfolio. There is many a business doing well with $10-$50m drugs that Pfizer would not bother with.